From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Sep 5 00:12:22 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id AAA27349 for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 00:12:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freebsd.gaffaneys.com (dialup5.gaffaneys.com [134.129.252.24]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id AAA27344 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 00:12:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from zach@localhost) by freebsd.gaffaneys.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA01712; Thu, 5 Sep 1996 02:12:40 -0500 (CDT) To: adrian@virginia.edu Cc: Paul DuBois , "Kevin P. Neal" , hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: void main References: From: Zach Heilig Date: 05 Sep 1996 02:12:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Adrian T. Filipi-Martin"'s message of Wed, 4 Sep 1996 12:06:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <87loepbfko.fsf@freebsd.gaffaneys.com> Lines: 24 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk "Adrian T. Filipi-Martin" writes: > What's wrong with this version? ;-) > int main (int argc, char *argv[], char *env[]); It is listed as a common extension in either an appendix or footnote of the standard (don't remember, and I don't have it in front of me), so even though neither are considered part of the standard, it is obvious that the standards committee was seriously considering adding it. Why they didn't is beyond be (but Terry Labert's explanation might be close to the real reason). Besides, there is nothing preventing a compiler from documenting extensions to the language. Gcc has lots of extensions. There are even compilers that have 'void main(void)' practically documented (it is used in some examples, which is close enough), but it is not a documented extension to gcc. That it appears to work in some situations is an accident. -- Zach Heilig (zach@blizzard.gaffaneys.com) | ALL unsolicited commercial email Support bacteria -- it's the | is unwelcome. I avoid dealing only culture some people have! | with companies that email ads.